i once found a harbor in some asian city, wooden fishing skiffs intermingled with heavy cargo ships. they were using an off-the-shelf camera to monitor traffic from a bridge, no passwords, and pan/tilt/zoom were enabled. i moved the camera over to watch people on the bridge, and the actual operator kept moving it back. he/she must have thought the thing was possessed.

the connection between AGW denier and holocaust denier exists only in your head. other people should not have to change their use of language because of your misinterpretation of a commonly used word.

thanks for eliminating any doubt that i had about you being a troll

btw, i work in tech not food service, idiot.

"Try to follow me here, I'll use small words to make it easier for you."

you are are an arrogant, think-headed prick

you are addressing statements to me saying "your definition" when i made no statement about entrapment. you are speaking for the majority based on the assumption that they agree with you. and you are incapable of defending the repeated statements to that effect that you are shitting all over this thread. and when you are called on it you shift the argument in a feeble rhetorical attempt to "win".

my point, that you are trying to dodge, is that "the definition of the term as used by the courts as this is clearly what the majority wants" makes no sense, because it is based on the rulings of judges, which is not an expression of the will of the majority.

1. i made no claims about the definition about entrapment, try reading the usernames once in a while

2. what does "the majority believes that they deserve prison" mean if you are not trying to speak for the majority. i may have missed the referendum on the issue, but i don't believe that you can claim anything involved in these cases has been put to a vote.

and you do not get to claim to be speaking for the majority.

5,000 annually in the US, according to the CDC. cite

but if you really cared to research facts that challenged your world view you would have looked it up yourself.

i guess you missed the part where she went to supervisors multiple times about lack of cert. on the scanners and lack of training manuals and was told to go pound sand. also, she only went to media after she was fired...as far as i am concerned for a federal employee to write a congressional rep. is basically escalating to a supervisor's boss.

not true. i was flying domestic and refused to go through a millimeter wave scanner. they were scanning every person that was going into that concourse. they called on a radio for a manual screen and walked me through a metal detector that i did not set off (nothing was in my pockets at the time). the screener then fetched my belonging from a bin and placed them on a table near me. he then recited a huge explanation of the search and what he would touch and with what part of his hand, etc. i then was given the most invasive and thorough "pat down" that i have ever gotten. examined the cuffs and waistband of my pants very closely, etc. the screener then swabbed his gloves and checked them for explosive residue.

at this airport they were scanning everyone and patting down anyone who refused, the fight back the other airport was only using a metal detector and very infrequently scanning randomly with a backscatter x-ray machine.

you really spent $15k on an Apple 1?

do you really see no value in a asynchronous phone-to-phone communication? i find it quite useful, but don't like holding long or complex conversations over it.

in america it is very rare to see a furnished apartment for rent. when you move in there is usually nothing but bare walls, a stove, and a refrigerator. so if you had a tv you would bring it with you from apartment to apartment.

that being said most of my friends only use them as additional screens for their computers and watching movies.

is there any evidence that anyone "involved" his wife and son? the only place i read that was in his email, and he is not very credible...

the answer to all of your questions are contained in the wikipedia link provided.

1) no.

2) in the 1930s

no, you banned semi-automatic weapons (and pump shotguns) in 1996.